On Sun, 11 May 2014 21:49:20 +0300 Samuli Suominen wrote: > stable was broken, and now it isn't, everything was done properly, > what more motive you need? QA, none; but Alon needs that motives, hence I asked him to talk to you. > Then I can't possibly understand your reasoning to intervene on > something that doesn't concern you, or the QA team, in the first > place, at all Sort of makes this even worse There's no intervention; as for concern, GLEP 48 says "The QA team is also tasked with the authority to ensure tree policies are respected" which means that the first logical next step for us is to await your talk and check up with the arch teams which is what was did here. > > I'm expecting apologies from you too, given the statements that I've > > quoted in the sub thread, it's a waste of valuable time to everyone > > involved, both you and me; so, I do apologize for trying to help > > out. > > Help out? Yes, help. > Everything technical (and technical is the only thing that matters to > QA) had already been done. No, that was not the case; the QA team was awaiting technical responses from the both of you, as well as the arch teams. > The time waste is still on-going, with amd64 and x86 unnecessarily on > the bug's CC list while they have been already done. They are aware they are CC-ed and keep themselves CC-ed; so, they are free to remove themselves as they see fit. > So, instead of actually helping out, like filing a new bug for > updating the outdated devmanual text regarding major arches > stabilizations to reflect statements from their leads, no help was > received... Before we can write up a commit, we first need to know the details; I've asked for them in #gentoo-qa, which are still awaiting a response. > > You know me well enough to know that I'm not messing with your work, > > at least not intentionally; if you do see it, feel free to /query > > me. > > > > Please consider to apologize to me in return... > > > > You can expect same tone from me here on out if you continue with > intervening on stuff with the QA badge that has no relationship to QA > at all, not really going to give an apology for the tone either We're tasked by GLEP 48 to do so; if that's not expected, feel free to propose a change, otherwise the QA team continues to fulfill this task. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D